Efficiency in Third Sector Partnerships for Delivering Local Government Services: The role of economies of scale, scope and learning

REFERENCES

• Alesch, D. J., and L. A. Dougharty. 1971. The Feasibility of Economies-of-Scale Analysis of Public Services. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Allen, P., S. Turner, W. Bartlett, V. Perotin, G. Matchaya, and B. Zamora. 2012. “Provider Diversity in the English NHS: A Study of Recent Developments in Four Local Health Economies.” Journal of Health Services Research and Policy 17 (Suppl. 1): 23–30. doi:10.1258/jhsrp.2011.011015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., and G. A. Boyne. 2009. “Size, Structure and Administrative Overheads: An Empirical Analysis of English Local Authorities.” Urban Studies 46: 739–759. doi:10.1177/0042098009102127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrews, R., and T. Entwistle. 2010. “Does Cross-Sectoral Partnership Deliver? An Empirical Exploration of Public Service Effectiveness, Efficiency, and Equity.” Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 20 (3): 679–701. doi:10.1093/jopart/mup045.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansoff, I. 1965. Corporate Strategy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
   Google Scholar
• Backus, P., and D. Clifford. 2010. Trends in the Concentration of Income among Charities. Birmingham: TSRC.
   Google Scholar
• Bel, G. 2013. “Local Government Size and Efficiency in Capital Intensive Services: What Evidence Is There of Economies of Scale, Density and Scope?” In The Challenge of Local Government Size: Theoretical Perspectives, International Experience and Policy Reform, edited by S. Lago-Peñas and J. Martinez-Vazquez, 148–170. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Besanko, D., D. Dranove, and M. Shanley. 2000. Economics of Strategy. 2nd ed. New York: Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Billis, D., and H. Glennerster. 1998. “Human Services and the Voluntary Sector: Towards a Theory of Comparative Advantage.” Journal of Social Policy 27 (1): 79–98. doi:10.1017/S0047279497005175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boston Consulting Group. 1970. Perspectives on Experience. Boston, MA: Boston Consulting Group.
   Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. 2004. “Public–Private Partnerships: From Contested Concepts to Prevalent Practice.” International Review of Administrative Sciences 70 (2): 199–215. doi:10.1177/0020852304044250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. 2006. “Developing New Forms of Partnership with the ‘Market’ in the Procurement of Public Services.” Public Administration 84 (1): 81–102. doi:10.1111/j.0033-3298.2006.00494.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. 2007. “Beyond Engagement and Participation: User and Community Coproduction of Public Services.” Public Administration Review 67 (5): 846–860. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2007.00773.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T. 2013. “Third Sector Service Delivery: Conceptual Approaches to Marrying Scale and Responsiveness.” In Changing Realities of the Third Sector, ESRC Public Policy Seminar Series, 9–11. Birmingham: TSRC and ESRC.
   Google Scholar
• Bovaird, T., and E. Loeffler. 2012. “From Engagement to Co-Production: the Contribution of Users and Communities to Outcomes and Public Value.” Voluntas 23 (4): 1119–1138. doi:10.1007/s11266-012-9309-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. 1996. “Scale, Performance and Local Government Reorganization: An Analysis of the Non‐Metropolitan Districts.” Public Money & Management 16 (3): 55–60. doi:10.1080/09540969609387934.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boyne, G. A. 1995. “Population Size and Economies of Scale in Local Government.” Policy and Politics 23 (3): 213–222. doi:10.1332/030557395782453446.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brandsen, T., V. Pestoff, and B. Verschuere. 2012. “Taking Research on Co-Production a Step Further.” In New Public Governance, the Third Sector and Co-Production, edited by V. Pestoff, T. Brandsen, and B. Verschuere, 381–388. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Cabinet Office. 2010. Modernising Commissioning: Increasing the Role of Charities, Social Enterprises, Mutuals and Cooperatives in Public Service Delivery. London: Cabinet Office.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, A., and K. S. Luchs. 1992. Strategic Synergy. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Carmel, E., and J. Harlock. 2008. “Instituting the ‘Third Sector’ as a Governable Terrain: Partnership, Procurement and Performance in the UK.” Policy & Politics 36 (2): 155–171. doi:10.1332/030557308783995017.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chandler, A. 1990. Scale and Scope. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Connolly, C., and N. Hyndman. 2004. “Performance Reporting: A Comparative Study of British and Irish Charities.” The British Accounting Review 36 (2): 127–154. doi:10.1016/j.bar.2003.10.004.
   Google Scholar
• Cooper, M. D. 1979. “The Economics of Library Size: A Preliminary Inquiry.” Library Trends 28 (1): 63–78.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Copus, C., A. Crow, and A. Clark. 2005. Council Size: Literature Review and Analysis: Report to the Electoral Commission. Birmingham: INLOGOV.
   Google Scholar
• Cram, C. 2012. “Connecting the Dots: Shared Services.” http://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/blog/2011/may/16/central-government-finance.
   Google Scholar
• Davis, K. E. 2001. “The Regulation of Social Enterprise.” In Between State and Market: Essays on Charities Law and Policy in Canada, edited by B. Chapman, J. Phillips, and D. Stevens, 485–510. Montreal, QC: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Di Antonio, E. 2011. How Young People Look for Information Online: A Survey of Views in Six European Countries. London: YouthNet.
   Google Scholar
• Dollery, B., and L. Crase. 2004. “Is Bigger Local Government Better? An Evaluation of the Case for Australian Municipal Amalgamation Programs.” Urban Policy and Research 22 (3): 265–275. doi:10.1080/0811114042000269290.
   Google Scholar
• Dollery, B., J. Byrnes, and L. Crase. 2008. “Australian Local Government Amalgamation: A Conceptual Analysis. Population Size and Scale Economies in Municipal Service Provision.” Australasian Journal of Regional Studies 14 (2): 167–175.
   Google Scholar
• Dollery, B. E., B. Grant, and M. Kortt. 2012. Councils in Cooperation: Shared Services and Australian Local Government. Sydney: Federation Press.
   Google Scholar
• Dranove, D. 1998. “Economies of Scale in Non-Revenue Producing Cost Centers: Implications for Hospital Mergers.” Journal of Health Economics 17 (1): 69–83. doi:10.1016/S0167-6296(97)00013-1.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duncombe, W., and J. Yinger. 1993. “An Analysis of Returns to Scale in Public Production, with an Application to Fire Protection.” Journal of Public Economics 52 (1): 49–72. doi:10.1016/0047-2727(93)90104-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Entwistle, T. W., and S. J. Martin. 2005. “From Competition to Collaboration in Public Service Delivery: A New Agenda for Research.” Public Administration 83 (1): 233–242. doi:10.1111/j.0033-3298.2005.00446.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feigenbaum, S. 1987. “Competition and Performance in the Nonprofit Sector: The Case of US Medical Research Charities.” The Journal of Industrial Economics 35 (3): 241–253. doi:10.2307/2098632.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Finney, M. 1997. “Scale Economies and Police Department Consolidation: Evidence from Los Angeles.” Contemporary Economic Policy 15 (1): 121–127. doi:10.1111/j.1465-7287.1997.tb00459.x.
   Google Scholar
• Gaynor, M., H. Seider, and W. B. Vogt. 2005. “The Volume–Outcome Effect, Scale Economies, and Learning-By-Doing.” American Economic Review 95 (2): 243–247. doi:10.1257/000282805774670329.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Girach, M., H. Hardisty, and A. Massey. 2012. A Clinical Commissioner’s Guide to the Voluntary Sector. London: ACEVO and NHS Alliance.
   Google Scholar
• Glendinning, C., M. Powell, and K. Rummery, eds. 2002. New Labour, Partnerships and the Governance of Welfare. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Grimshaw, D., J. Rubery, and S. Marino. 2012. Public Sector Pay and Procurement in Europe during the Crisis: The Challenges Facing Local Government and the Prospects for Segmentation, Inequalities and Social Dialogue. Manchester: EWERC, University of Manchester.
   Google Scholar
• Grosskopf, S., and S. Yaisawarng. 1990. “Economies of Scope in the Provision of Local Public Services.” National Tax Journal 43 (1): 61–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta, S. P., and J. P. Hutton. 1968. “Economies of Scale in Local Government Services.” In Royal Commission on Local Government in England, Research Studies 3, 1–44. London: HMSO.
   Google Scholar
• Hager, M. A., T. Pollak, and P. Rooney. 2001. Variations in Overhead and Fundraising Efficiency Measures: The Influence of Size, Age, and Subsector. Washington, DC: National Center for Charitable Statistics.
   Google Scholar
• Harbaugh, W. 1998. “What Do Donations Buy? A Model of Philanthropy Based on Prestige and Warm Glow.” Journal of Public Economics 67 (2): 269–284. doi:10.1016/S0047-2727(97)00062-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herts, C. C. 2013. “Working with Communities in Hertfordshire.” http://www.hertsdirect.org/your-community/workcominherts/.
   Google Scholar
• HM Treasury. 2007. “The Future Role of the Third Sector in Social and Economic Regeneration: Final Report.” Cm 7189. London: TSO.
   Google Scholar
• Hopkins, A. 2007. “Delivering Public Services: Service Users’ Experience of the Third Sector.” A report to the Office of the Third Sector. London: National Consumer Council.
   Google Scholar
• Hyndman, N., and D. McKillop. 1999. “Conversion Ratios in Charities in England and Wales: An Investigation of Economies of Scale.” Financial Accountability & Management 15 (2): 135–153. doi:10.1111/1468-0408.00078.
   Google Scholar
• Jarvis, H. 2007. “Home Truths about Care-Less Competitiveness.” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 31 (1): 207–214. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2427.2007.00715.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kendall, J., and M. Knapp 2000. “Inputs, Activities and Comparative Performance.” Civil Society Working Paper 14. London: LSE.
   Google Scholar
• Kretzmann, J., and J. McKnight. 1993. Building Communities from the inside Out: A Path toward Finding and Mobilizing A Community’s Assets. Evanston, IL: Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research.
   Google Scholar
• Laband, D. N., and B. F. Lentz. 2004. “Do Costs Differ between For-Profit and Not-For-Profit Producers of Higher Education?” Research in Higher Education 45 (4): 429–441. doi:10.1023/B:RIHE.0000027394.33115.71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Langlois, R. N. 1999. “Scale, Scope, and the Reuse of Knowledge.” In Economic Organization and Economic Knowledge, edited by S. C. Dow and P. E. Earl, 239–254. Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Levitt, T. 1973. The Third Sector, New Tactics for a Responsive Society. New York: AMACOM.
   Google Scholar
• Macmillan, R. 2010. “The Third Sector Delivering Public Services: An Evidence Review.” TSRC Working Paper 20. Birmingham: Third Sector Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• McKillop, D. G., and B. Quinn. 2009. “Cost Performance of Irish Credit Unions.” Journal of Co-Operative Studies 42 (1): 23–36.
   Google Scholar
• Milbourne, L. 2009. “Remodelling the Third Sector: Advancing Collaboration or Competition in Community-Based Initiatives?” Journal of Social Policy 38: 277–297. doi:10.1017/S0047279408002845.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miozzo, M., M. Lehrer, R. DeFillippi, D. Grimshaw, and A. Ordanini. 2012. “Economies of Scope through Multi-Unit Skill Systems: The Organization of Large Design Firms.” British Journal of Management 23 (2): 145–164. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8551.2010.00699.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nayyar, P. R. 1993. “Performance Effects of Information Asymmetry and Economies of Scope in Diversified Service Firms.” Academy of Management Journal 36 (1): 28–57. doi:10.2307/256511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• OECD. 2010. Strategies to Improve Rural Service Delivery. Paris: OECD.
   Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E. 1996. “Crossing the Great Divide: Coproduction, Synergy, and Development.” World Development 24 (6): 1073–1087. doi:10.1016/0305-750X(96)00023-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostrom, E., R. B. Parks, and G. P. Whitaker. 1973. “Do We Really Want to Consolidate Urban Police Forces? A Reappraisal of Some Old Assertions.” Public Administration Review 33: 423–432.
   Google Scholar
• Panzar, J. C., and R. D. Willig. 1981. “Economies of Scope.” American Economic Review 71 (2): 268–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parks, R. 1995. “Do We Really Want to Consolidate Urban Areas?” In Polycentric Circles, edited by R. Eliason and P. Dalecki. Bloomington: Indiana University, Workshop in Political Theory and Policy Analysis.
   Google Scholar
• Parrado, S., G. van Ryzin, T. Bovaird, and E. Löffler. 2013. “Correlates of Co-Production: Evidence from a Five-Nation Survey of Citizens.” International Public Management Journal 16 (1): 85–112. doi:10.1080/10967494.2013.796260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PASC. 2008. “Public Services and the Third Sector: Rhetoric and Reality.” Eleventh Report of Session 2007-08. London: House of Commons, Public Administration Select Committee.
   Google Scholar
• Pollitt, C., and G. Bouckaert. 2011. Public Management Reform: A Comparative Analysis – New Public Management, Governance and the Neo-Weberian State. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prud’homme, R. 1995. “The Dangers of Decentralization.” The World Bank Research Observer 10 (2): 201–220. doi:10.1093/wbro/10.2.201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rees, J., D. Mullins, and T. Bovaird. 2012a. Third Sector Partnerships for Public Service Delivery: An Evidence Review. Birmingham: Third Sector Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Rees, J., D. Mullins, and T. Bovaird. 2012b. Partnership Working. Birmingham: Third Sector Research Centre.
   Google Scholar
• Reino, J. L. G. 2010. “Essays on Optimal Jurisdictional Size for Local Service Delivery.” Doctoral Dissertation, Georgia State University.
   Google Scholar
• Ritzer, G. 1993. The McDonaldisation of Society. Los Angeles, CA: Pine Forge Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ruggiero, J. 2000. “Nonparametric Estimation of Returns to Scale in the Public Sector with an Application to the Provision of Educational Services.” Journal of the Operational Research Society 51 (8): 906–912. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2600051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seddon, J. 2008. Systems Thinking in the Public Sector. Axminster: Triarchy.
   Google Scholar
• Teece, D. J. 1980. “Economies of Scope and the Scope of the Enterprise.” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 1 (3): 223–247. doi:10.1016/0167-2681(80)90002-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walzer, N. 1972. “Economies of Scale and Municipal Police Services: The Illinois Experience.” The Review of Economics and Statistics 54 (4): 431–438. doi:10.2307/1924570.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weese, E. 2012. “Efficiencies of Scale in Local Public Good Provision: Estimation via Coalition Panel Data.” Yale University. Accessed June 12, 2014. http://www.princeton.edu/econtheorycenter/pdf/Weese_japan3.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Williams, S., and P. Palmer. 1998. “The State of Charity Accounting: Developments, Improvements and Continuing Problems.” Financial Accountability and Management 14 (4): 265–279.
   Google Scholar
• Worthington, A., and B. Dollery. 2000. “An Empirical Survey of Frontier Efficiency Measurement Techniques in Local Government.” Local Government Studies 26 (2): 23–52. doi:10.1080/03003930008433988.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yates, B. T., D. Mannix, M. C. Freed, J. Campbell, M. Johnsen, K. Jones, and C. R. Blyler. 2011. “Consumer-Operated Service Programs: Monetary and Donated Costs and Cost-Effectiveness.” Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 35 (2): 91–99. doi:10.2975/35.2.2011.91.99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar